Substitutes and Runners

[gooders]

Hopefully it's not just me, but what do you, my colleagues, feels about the imbalance in attitudes towards this law by the ICC?
On the one hand, in international matches, if a player sustains an injury whilst batting, he is not allowed any assistance in running. However, if a fielder in the same match wishes to leave the field for a "comfort break", then we regularly see a substitute whilst the fielder is missing.
I personally feel that if batsmen are not allowed runners, then fielders should not be allowed a substitute either.
What are your opinions my friends?

[viswajith]

i agree with you Gooders....

[jaybee]

I agree too. In fact, in my experience, the fielding side is more likely to take advantage than the batsmen.

We all know the chaos which ensues when there's a runner involved and, as a batsman (of sorts) in my younger days I only used a runner once when I could hardly walk out to the pitch.

[budster]

i suspect that the imbalance is due to the ICC wishing to get dismissal decisions as accurate as possible.

when a runner is involved he could be required to run anywhere away from the main pitch when the injured striker is batting. in these circumstances it is probably very difficult for cameras to provide the necessary clarity of picture for the television umpire to make a good decision so the easy thing is to ban runners.

as for fielders leaving the field i beleive that they should be accompanied by one of the 'off field' officials from the moment they leave until they return or it is clear that they will not be able to return. the officials should ensure that ther is nothing untoward happening.

it does seem bizarre that since players get a (drinks) break every hour they should ever need to leave the field bteween either breaks or intervals